Twelve Baptist Objections Met & Answered

Twelve Baptist Objections Met & Answered

A series of radio addresses directed at answering twelve objections raised by a Baptist preacher to the Bible doctrine concerning baptism "for the remission of sins" as taught

in Acts 2:38 and other New Testament texts. These sermons were delivered by Jeff Asher over KGAS 1590AM on the Words of Life Broadcast sponsored by the

Northside Church of Christ which meets at 701 West Cottage Road in Carthage, Texas.

Prepared by Jeff Asher (2005)

12 Reasons Why Baptism Is

Not Essential For Salvation

By Dr. Robert Morey

The idea that baptism is essential for salvation is a pernicious doctrine taught by Roman Catholics, Mormons, Lutherans, United Pentecostals, and the Campbellites who have the gall to call themselves the "Church of Christ."

The Campbellites are referring only to those baptisms performed according to their doctrine of baptism. No one else's baptisms are viewed as valid, not even those done by other Campbellite cults! While the first reason applies only to the Campbellites, the other arguments can be used against anyone who claims that baptism is essential for salvation.

The Twelve Reasons

1. If the Campbellite doctrine of baptism is true then the very men who founded the "Restoration Movement" which later developed into the "Church of Christ" churches were never saved! All Thomas and Alexander Campbell had was the infant baptism they received from the Presbyterians and the adult baptism they received from the Baptists! They were never baptized a third time "in order to obtain remission of sins" according to the Campbellite doctrine of baptism. How can the Campbellite church, gospel and baptism be of God when the men who "restored" those very things were unsaved children of the devil according to their own teachings?

2. John the Baptist's baptism did not save anyone although it was done "for the remission of sins" (Mk. 1:4). John clearly stated that his baptism was only of water in contrast to Jesus' baptism which would be of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:11). When this is added to the fact that people who had John's baptism were re?baptized with Christian baptism (Acts 19:1-5), it is clear that John's baptism did not save anyone. Since John's baptism did not save anyone, then such terminology as "for remission of sins" does not imply baptismal remission. This logically removes many of the arguments used by baptismal regenerationists.

3. Jesus never baptized anyone (John 4:2). If baptism is essential for salvation, why didn't Jesus baptize anyone? Since he did not baptize anyone, how did he save anyone?

4. Paul clearly states that baptism is not part of Gospel preaching. Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel (I Corinthians 1:14-17). Then in I Corinthians 15:1-4, when he summarized the Gospel, no mention of baptism was made, I make known to you, brethren, the Gospel which l preached to you...that Christ died for our sins...t hat he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day. This is in agreement with Acts 20:21 where he summarized his preaching as, Repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. How can baptism be essential to salvation when it is not part of the Gospel?

5. Paul argues in Romans 3:28-30 that since there is only one God there can be only one way of salvation. This means that whatever is essential to salvation today must be the same throughout all ages. While faith and repentance pass this test, baptism does not because it was not present in the Old Testament. How can baptism be essential to salvation when it was not present in the Old Testament?

6. Paul argues that justification has always been "by faith apart from the works of the law." Abraham: Before the law (Romans 4:1-5). David: After the law (Romans 4:6-8). No Campbellite, Catholic, Lutheran, Mormon, United Pentecostal, etc., has ever produced one verse where justification is by baptism.

7. Baptism is the N.T. parallel to circumcision just as the Lord's Supper is the parallel to the Passover (Colossians 2:11-12). Since circumcision "is nothing" (I Corinthians 7:19) and did not save anyone, then why should baptism?

8. Paul points out that Abraham was justified by faith before he obeyed God in circumcision (Romans 4:911, 16; 4:23?5:2). This clearly applies to us.

Abraham

You and Me

Justified by Faith

Justified by Faith

Before he was circumcised

Before we are baptized

The Campbellite doctrine destroys the parallel between circumcision and baptism.

9. Cornelius believed the Gospel, was saved, filled with he Holy Spirit, spoke in tongues and then got baptized (Acts 10:44-48). Did not Cornelius' salvation take place before his baptism? The text clearly states that Cornelius and his family heard the word, believed it, were saved, filled with the spirit, spoke in tongues and then were baptized. None of this should have taken place if the Campbellite doctrine was true.

10. The thief on the cross went to heaven without baptism. Since Christ died before the thief died, the thief went to paradise through the shed blood of Christ (Hebrews 9:14-17). If baptism is essential to go to heaven, how did the thief get there without being baptized?

11. The Campbellite doctrine makes salvation dependent upon the availability of water and of a Campbellite. While someone who is alone can believe in Jesus in the desert or at the North Pole, will his salvation be denied because no water for a Campbellite baptism is present?

12. The Campbellite doctrine confuses the symbol with what it represents and is based on a superstitious and magical view of baptism. Since the Campbellites admit that the bread and the wine are only symbols of the body and blood of Jesus, then on what grounds do they deny that baptism is only a symbol of salvation?

Conclusion:

The Campbellites "twist the scriptures to their own destruction" (II Peter 3:16) when they try to mix works with grace (Romans 11:6). Salvation is by GRACE through faith in Christ apart from the works of the law such as baptism, church membership, etc. To make salvation dependent on the presence of water and the absence of a piano is ridiculous as well as unscriptural.

Twelve Baptist Objections

Met & Answered

I have before me this morning an article written by Dr. Robert Morey, a Baptist preacher, entitled Twelve Reasons Why Baptism Is Not Essential for Salvation. I have never met Dr. Morey but am confident that he is a good man and that his article is well intentioned. I admire anyone who is willing, in a fair and evenhanded manner, to oppose what they perceive to be religious error. I even admire a vigorous attack of that error and a hearty defense of what is believed to be true. I do not get offended if someone thinks I am wrong and need to be corrected. Better that, than to be ignored and left to be destroyed by my mistakes. So, Dr. Morey is not an enemy and his words of rebuke and correction are not perceived as being mean spirited or hateful. By the same token, my objections to his words are not to be construed in any manner other than the response of one who believes he is right in his convictions, that the positions he holds are quite defensible from the Scriptures. Furthermore, my response to this article is intended to repay the courtesy I have been shown and respond in as kind and concerned a manner as I have been approached. And so, I enter into a "debate" of "my cause" with "my neighbor," as Solomon characterizes it in Proverbs chapter 25 and verse nine. I will not do so hastily, I intend to thoroughly examine these objections and complaints so that I might be a "wise reprover" and speak words that are like "apples of gold in networks of silver" (25:11).

Now, let's turn to the "twelve reasons."

Reason # 1: Because the Campbells Would Be Lost

Dr. Morey says, "If the Campbellite doctrine of baptism is true then the very men who founded the `Restoration Movement' which later developed into the `Church of Christ' churches were never saved! All Thomas and Alexander Campbell had was the infant baptism they received from the Presbyterians and the adult baptism they received from the Baptists! They were never baptized a third time `in order to obtain remission of sins' according to the Campbellite doctrine of baptism."

Throughout his article Dr. Morey refers to Christians and the Church of Christ as "Campbellites" and the "Campbellite Church." The term Campbellite has been around for the better part of two centuries. Its origin is attributed to Robert Owen, the English infidel who came to America to establish a movement of "social reform" (A.B. Barret, The Shattered Chain, p. 32). Owen debated Alexander Campbell at Cincinnati, Ohio in 1829. Campbell was one of the few Americans at the time that was willing and able to take on Owen and expose his atheism and socialism for the sophistry and vitriol it was. Campbell was hailed at the time as a great defender of the Christian faith. Yet, those who have been prejudiced by the promoters of sectarianism and religious division have taken up the epithet coined by infidels and modernists.

Alexander Campbell labored the bulk of his adult life with a view to encouraging others to abandon sectarianism and be simply and only Christians. It is a tragedy that some would accuse him of being the head and founder of the "Campbellite" church. This pious man utterly repudiated the designation. For example, in 1826 he wrote:

"Some religious editors in Kentucky call those who are desirous of seeing the ancient order of things restored...the Campbellites...This may go well with some; but all who fear God and keep his commands will pity and deplore the weakness and folly of those who either think to convince or to persuade by such means" (The Christian Baptist, Vol. IV, pp. 88-89).

In 1828 Mr. Campbell responded to the question: "What is Campbellism?" in the following fashion: "It is a nickname of reproach invented and adopted by those whose views, feelings and desires are all sectarian-- who cannot conceive of Christianity in any other light than an ISM" (Christian Baptist, Vol. V, p. 270).

Once when Campbell was in New Orleans, a local newspaper characterized him as the "founder" of a denomination. Mr. Campbell was not pleased. He penned a letter to the editor in which said the following:

"You have done me, gentlemen, too much honor in saying I am the `founder' of the denomination, quite numerous and respectable in many portions of the West, technically known as `Christians,' but more commonly as `Campbellites.'

"I have always repudiated all human heads and human names for the people of the Lord, and shall feel very thankful if you will correct the erroneous impression which your article may have made in thus representing me as the founder of a religious denomination" (The Memoirs of Alexander Campbell, Vol. ii. p. 441).

Now, the truth is, Alexander Campbell denied that he was the head or founder of anything with respect to the Church of Christ. It is a gross misrepresentation of him and his work to call him such. Furthermore, I neither endorse nor accept him as such. I was a Christian long before I ever heard of Alexander Campbell. He did not die for me neither was I baptized into his name. It is Christ that died and it is His name into which I was baptized (cf. I Corinthians 1:13). I recognize Jesus of Nazareth and Him only, as the builder, foundation and head of the Church of Christ. Calling me a "Campbellite" because I happen to agree with some things a man named Campbell taught would be like me calling the Baptists "Calvinists" because they agree with some of the things a man named Calvin taught. I am what I am religiously, and practice what I practice as a matter of faith in the word of God. I will give book, chapter and verse for everything I believe and practice as these studies progress.

Concerning Alexander Campbell's baptism, his biographer, close friend and colleague, Dr. Robert Richardson, gives a detailed account of it in his Memoirs of Alexander Campbell (pp. 396 ff). The testimony of the participants and witnesses to Campbell's baptism establishes that what occurred in June of 1812 was not according to Baptist tradition. There was no Baptist congregation present, there was no "religious experience" given and there was no vote taken. The witnesses all bear record that Matthias Luce, the Baptist preacher that immersed Campbell, objected at first to doing so. However, after a presentation of the reasons for asking to be immersed contrary to Baptist practice, Luce consented and Campbell was baptized on a simple confession of faith in Christ. It is clear that Campbell and the others did not submit to what Dr. Morey and all other Baptists recognize as "Baptist baptism." So, Morey is wrong when he says Campbell had "Baptist" baptism. The evidence is clear that Campbell was not seeking Baptist baptism, but the baptism taught in the New Testament.

For the sake of argument, let's grant that Campbell was not immersed for the remission of sins and that the only baptism he had was that of the Presbyterians and Baptists. What has Dr. Morey proven? Well, in the first place, he has proven that I am not a Campbellite and has made one of himself since it is he, not I, who has Baptist baptism which, according to him, is the only baptism Campbell had. Furthermore, Dr. Morey proves himself and all Baptists to be lost because they have the same Baptist baptism which he says Alexander Campbell had which was not baptism for the remission of sins. Therefore, Dr. Morey has succeeded in demonstrating by this argument that he and all Baptists are in need of baptism for remission of sins which is the baptism I preach.

Alexander Campbell is not the point at issue in any discussion about water baptism. I am perfectly willing to let the lord judge Mr. Campbell. We will never settle the question of his immersion to the satisfaction of some. If Alexander Campbell was not baptized for the remission of sins that does not prove the New Testament does not teach it. As I said earlier, I am following Jesus Christ not Alexander Campbell.

Reason #2: Because John's Baptism Did Not Save Anyone

Dr. Morey states, "John the Baptist's baptism did not save anyone although it was done `for the remission of sins' (Mark 1:4)." Dr. Morey gives three reasons for this conclusion: (1) John`s baptism was of water only and (2) Jesus' baptism was of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:11); (3) the people who had John's baptism were re-baptized with Christian baptism (Acts 19:1-5).

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download